1. MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---After the death of Shah Muhammad, his inheritance was mutated in which Mst. Sardar Begum was shown as his daughter and entitled to his estate. However, the appellants who are the children of Shah Muhammad from Mst. Amina Bibi challenged the mutation and got it cancelled on the revenue side. On account of the above, Sardar Begum filed a suit claiming that she is the daughter of Shah Muhammad born out of the wedlock with Mst. Begum Bibi and therefore is entitled to inherit his estate. The suit was contested by the appellants. After trial, the learned Trial Court dismissed the suit. The appeal of the respondents also met the same fate.
2. However, in revisional jurisdiction the learned High Court has come to the conclusion that the parentage of Mst. Sardar Begum has been proved through a birth certificate coupled with the statements of close relative(s) of the family and the persons who otherwise have the knowledge of such relationship, whereas the learned Courts below have ignored such evidence which is tantamount to misreading of the evidence and, therefore, while accepting the revision has reversed the decisions of the two courts below and decreed the suit. Leave in this case was granted to examine the effect of non-appearance of Sardar Begum or her attorney(s) in the witness box; suffice it to say that Mst. Sardar Begum had died before the conclusion of the trial, thus obviously she could not appear. As far as the other evidence is concerned there is overwhelming evidence to prove that she was the daughter of Shah Muhammad out of his wedlock with Begum Bibi. This is even so stated by the maternal nephew of Sardar Muhammad.
3. This evidence is in line with the law laid down in the case reported as Ghulam Muhammad and another v. Allah Yar and others (PLD 1965 Lahore 482); besides, there is no rebuttal of the birth certificate which had been brought on the record, duly exhibited and at that time no objection qua the proof was taken by the appellants. In our view, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the non-appearance of Mst. Sardar Begum or her attorney(s) is not fatal to the case of the plaintiffs/respondents, because of the overwhelming oral evidence and also on account of the documentary evidence which has not been rebutted by the appellants. No case for interference, has been made out.
4. Dismissed accordingly.